Q. Which are the three most important issues in deciding how you would vote at a Federal election?

Total

22 Apr 14

Vote ALP

Vote Lib/Nat

Vote Grn

Vote other

23 Jul 13

30 Jul 12

6 June 11

25 Jan 10

Management of the economy

54%

43%

75%

22%

44%

45%

64%

61%

63%

Ensuring a quality education for all children

27%

35%

18%

38%

20%

25%

26%

26%

23%

Ensuring the quality of Australia’s health system

50%

54%

43%

62%

52%

42%

47%

49%

48%

Protecting the environment

13%

12%

7%

42%

14%

12%

11%

15%

16%

A fair industrial relations system

12%

17%

11%

8%

12%

10%

12%

8%

na

Political leadership

15%

11%

24%

6%

13%

21%

25%

17%

23%

Addressing climate change

10%

13%

4%

28%

9%

11%

9%

15%

16%

Controlling interest rates

9%

9%

11%

2%

7%

13%

9%

13%

15%

Australian jobs and protection of local industries

37%

39%

37%

18%

37%

39%

41%

32%

33%

Ensuring a quality water supply

4%

5%

3%

3%

5%

3%

3%

5%

12%

Housing affordability

17%

18%

16%

13%

19%

17%

13%

16%

14%

Ensuring a fair taxation system

20%

19%

20%

9%

23%

20%

18%

17%

14%

Security and the war on terrorism

5%

3%

8%

3%

5%

8%

5%

8%

9%

Treatment of asylum seekers

8%

5%

5%

32%

9%

14%

10%

5%

na

Managing population growth

9%

6%

10%

8%

16%

9%

8%

12%

na

54% of people surveyed rated management of the economy as one of their three most important issues, followed by 50% ensuring the quality of Australia’s health system, 37% Australian jobs and protection of local industries and 27% ensuring a quality education for all children.

Main changes since this question was asked last July – management of the economy up 9%, ensuring the quality of Australia’s health system up 8%, political leadership down 6% and treatment of asylum seekers down 6%.

Q. If a Federal Election was held today to which party will you probably give your first preference vote? If not sure, which party are you currently leaning toward?

Q. If don’t know -Well which party are you currently leaning to?

Sample size = 1,911 respondents

First preference/leaning to

Election

21 Aug 10

4 weeks ago

19/11/12

2 weeks ago

3/12/12

Last week

10/12/12

This week

17/12/12

Liberal

43%

44%

45%

45%

National

3%

3%

3%

3%

Total Lib/Nat

43.6%

46%

47%

48%

48%

Labor

38.0%

36%

37%

36%

36%

Greens

11.8%

10%

9%

8%

8%

Other/Independent

6.6%

9%

7%

8%

8%

2PP

Election

21 Aug 10

4 weeks ago

2 weeks ago

Last week

This week

Total Lib/Nat

49.9%

53%

53%

54%

55%

Labor

50.1%

47%

47%

46%

45%

NB. The data in the above tables comprise 2-week averages derived from the first preference/leaning to voting questions. Respondents who select ‘don’t know’ are not included in the results. The two-party preferred estimate is calculated by distributing the votes of the other parties according to their preferences at the 2010 election. These estimates have a confidence interval of approx. plus or minus 2-3%.

Q. If a Federal Election was held today to which party will you probably give your first preference vote? If not sure, which party are you currently leaning toward?

Q. If don’t know -Well which party are you currently leaning to?

Sample size = 1,888 respondents

First preference/leaning to

Election

21 Aug 10

4 weeks ago

12/11/12

2 weeks ago

26/11/12

Last week

3/12/12

This week

10/12/12

Liberal

42%

44%

44%

45%

National

3%

3%

3%

3%

Total Lib/Nat

43.6%

45%

47%

47%

48%

Labor

38.0%

37%

36%

37%

36%

Greens

11.8%

9%

10%

9%

8%

Other/Independent

6.6%

8%

8%

7%

8%

2PP

Election

21 Aug 10

4 weeks ago

2 weeks ago

Last week

This week

Total Lib/Nat

49.9%

52%

53%

53%

54%

Labor

50.1%

48%

47%

47%

46%

NB. The data in the above tables comprise 2-week averages derived from the first preference/leaning to voting questions. Respondents who select ‘don’t know’ are not included in the results. The two-party preferred estimate is calculated by distributing the votes of the other parties according to their preferences at the 2010 election. These estimates have a confidence interval of approx. plus or minus 2-3%.

Q. If a Federal Election was held today to which party will you probably give your first preference vote? If not sure, which party are you currently leaning toward?

Q. If don’t know -Well which party are you currently leaning to?

Sample size = 1,832 respondents

First preference/leaning to

Election

21 Aug 10

4 weeks ago

29/10/12

2 weeks ago

12/11/12

Last week

19/11/12

This week

Liberal

44%

42%

43%

44%

National

4%

3%

3%

3%

Total Lib/Nat

43.6%

48%

45%

46%

47%

Labor

38.0%

36%

37%

36%

36%

Greens

11.8%

9%

9%

10%

10%

Other/Independent

6.6%

7%

8%

9%

8%

2PP

Election

21 Aug 10

4 weeks ago

2 weeks ago

Last week

This week

Total Lib/Nat

49.9%

54%

52%

53%

53%

Labor

50.1%

46%

48%

47%

47%

NB. The data in the above tables comprise 2-week averages derived from the first preference/leaning to voting questions. Respondents who select ‘don’t know’ are not included in the results. The two-party preferred estimate is calculated by distributing the votes of the other parties according to their preferences at the 2010 election. These estimates have a confidence interval of approx. plus or minus 2-3%.

Q. If a Federal Election was held today to which party will you probably give your first preference vote? If not sure, which party are you currently leaning toward?

Q. If don’t know -Well which party are you currently leaning to?

Sample size = 2,077 respondents

First preference/leaning to

Election

21 Aug 10

4 weeks ago

13/8/12

2 weeks ago

27/8/12

Last week

3/9/12

This week

10 Sept 2012

Liberal

46%

46%

44%

44%

National

3%

3%

3%

3%

Total Lib/Nat

43.6%

49%

49%

48%

47%

Labor

38.0%

32%

32%

34%

34%

Greens

11.8%

10%

10%

9%

9%

Other/Independent

6.6%

8%

9%

9%

9%

2PP

Election

21 Aug 10

4 weeks ago

2 weeks ago

Last week

This week

Total Lib/Nat

49.9%

56%

56%

55%

55%

Labor

50.1%

44%

44%

45%

45%

NB. The data in the above tables comprise 2-week averages derived from the first preference/leaning to voting questions. Respondents who select ‘don’t know’ are not included in the results. The two-party preferred estimate is calculated by distributing the votes of the other parties according to their preferences at the 2010 election. These estimates have a confidence interval of approx. plus or minus 2-3%.

Yesterday, Cuts Hurt took its first step publicly to paint the real picture of the devastation underway because of the cuts unleashed on the people by Liberal state premiers. Yesterday, we explained that those cuts hurt everyone. It’s worth another closer look today.

One way of thinking about this is comparing the actual cuts to the what those cuts actually mean in the your daily life and the lives of the hard-working people in the public sector.

What has been the impact on services so far?
• The number of outstanding DHS debts has blown out to 300,000
• Some DHS customers now wait 26 days for follow up appointments, this used to be 14 days
• Waiting times in DHS office are now very often over one hour
• Cuts in DHS regional office management has resulted in administrative confusion, including
no responsibility for health and safety issues, lack of basic office supplies so that staff hide
stationery for their team, and staff cleaning tea towels for a whole building as there are no
contracted services.
• Some DHS programs have been told to divert all calls to voice mail and only respond to email
queries resulting in frustration for staff committed to helping their communities
• Baby Bonus claims should be processed in 21 days, some now take 70 days
• DHS call centre waiting times have blown out from two minutes to more than 30 minutes
• Student claims processing are regularly exceeding their 21 day target
• Family Payments claim backlog has jumped from 30,000 to 70,000 and it now take 22 days
to process a claim
• Security guards have been put in 70 DHS offices (at a cost of $7 million over 18 months) to
counter a rise in aggression, violence and anger from welfare recipients
• Quarantine cutting sniffer dog screening at airports
• Once staffing numbers drop below a certain level, Customs district offices may not have
enough people to safely perform their duties. Similarly, declining staff numbers will makes
shift-work difficult which means that on some days, vessels may not be boarded after 5pm
• Veterans now have to wait 40 days for pension increases to be processed
• Customs budget was cut by $34 million in 2011. This meant the loss of 77 front line staff
causing a peak wait time of increase of up to 24 minutes at Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne
and Perth airports. At the same time, passenger arrives are set to increase by 4.5% a year
over the next 10 years
• Fair Work Australia is going to close its call centre with no plan for how these calls will be
handled by the organisation
• The Australian National Maritime Museum sold a number of vessels in its working vessel
fleet as a saving exercise. This included the historic tugboat Bareki. They now hire another
tugboat
• The Bureau of Meteorology announced it will not back fill positions when people are on
leave. This creates increased workloads for when people return from leave and will
encourage some people to work when on leave
• Cultural Institutions: the ongoing 1.5% efficiency dividend and capital expenditure cuts have
lead to major problems at Screen Australia, the National Museum, the War Memorial, Old
Parliament House; the National Film and Sound Archive, the National Archives, The
Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, the National Library and
the National Maritime Museum. Two major exhibitions planned for the National Gallery
have been postponed, including the internationally significant National Aboriginal triennial.

So, that’s one way of looking at the direct connection between cuts and services.

Let’s bring together a few strands today: why is the popularity of Liberal state premiers on the decline, why is Tony Abbott panicking when John Howard goes off message and why has Labor’s polling strength been a bit on the upswing? It comes down to a simple reason: a lot of people are starting to see that the Coalition’s meat cleaver, and ideological love of the “free market”, is hurting everyone as it whacks at our social safety net and services. Because cuts hurt everyone.

Indeed, that’s the simple but pretty clear message of a campaign launched by the Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) called “Cuts Hurt”. Over the next few posts, I’m going to go into some details about these cuts. But, for now, consider this, from the Cuts Hurt site:

Compared to most OECD countries, Australia already has a modest public sector. It is the same size today as it was in 1991, yet our population has grown by 5 million people. Every year, public sector workers deliver big things for Australia.

In 2010/11 public sector workers:

handled 37 million Centrelink enquiries

processed 319 million Medicare claims

issued 6,000 flood warnings

seized 5,187 kilograms of illicit drugs and drug-making chemicals

cleared 13.9 million air passengers through customs.

Everyone benefits from the services provided by public servants. Try it: think about what you service you used from the above list—which is just a small sampling—or ask a friend, family member or neighbor. Then think bigger to defence, tax collection, managing our water supplies, health policy and demographic planning. It doesn’t happen by itself.

The polling showed that 53 per cent of people believed the cuts would lead to worse services, while only 14 per cent believed they would lead to better services. It also showed that a clear majority of people believed the cuts would adversely impact rural and regional areas while 60 per cent believed that cuts to support staff would hurt frontline services.

Nadine Flood, CPSU’s national secretary, had it exactly right when she wrote recently:

The Coalition’s plan may deliver short-term savings, but will do long-term damage to services that have helped generations of Australians.

Australians shouldn’t be asking themselves if we can afford our public service, they should be asking if we can afford not to have it?

My father used to use the old cliche that a recession is a downturn that hits your neighbor, while a depression is a economic crisis that hits you. That’s the bottom line here: sometimes, in the rush of the day, we don’t see the impact of the cuts to our society—until we need a service that isn’t there or has been so starved for funding that it can’t respond fast enough.

Q. Do you think you personally would be better off or worse off financially if Tony Abbott and the Liberals were in Government?

Total

Vote

Labor

Vote

Lib/Nat

Vote

Greens

Total better off

30%

4%

64%

6%

Total worse off

32%

69%

3%

52%

A lot better off

10%

1%

22%

–

A little better off

20%

3%

42%

6%

Make no difference

24%

18%

27%

21%

A little worse off

10%

19%

2%

11%

A lot worse off

22%

50%

1%

41%

No opinion

14%

9%

6%

21%

30% of respondents think they would be personally better off financially if the Liberals were in Government and 32% think they would be financially worse off. 24% think it would make no difference to them financially.

Respondents aged 45-64 thought they would be more likely to be worse off (32% better/40% worse) while for those aged 65+, 47% thought they would be better off and 24% worse off.